No issue divides Americans like the war in Iraq which is why it is so important that it be debated openly in the public square. And with a population of 300 million, which makes political pamphleteering obsolete and ineffective, the most effective means of communicating with the public is through the airwaves.
Now, it appears that the war is going to get a complete airing over the next few weeks.
Yesterday, the Politico reported that up to $30 million may be spent on the media blitz. And despite its critics this type of citizen outreach is exactly what the First Amendment was designed to protect.
Although some of the members of the organization have revealed their identity, others have chosen to remain anonymous. By remaining anonymous, not only do the contributors follow a long tradition (James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, John Trenchard, Thomas Gordon..) of anonymous communication, but anonymous communication allows people to judge the message by its merits rather than who is saying it.
More importantly, both sides of the argument are exercising their constitutional rights to engage the public and there is nothing "fake" about it. As CCP once noted "There’s nothing ‘fake’ about asking people to get involved in the political process. Regardless of who alerts citizens to a political issue, the choice to contact their legislator ultimately rests with the individual. If they do, that’s ‘real’ grassroots by any measure."
The fact that the ads are primarily scheduled to run in Republican districts caused Tom Matzzie of Moveon.org to issue a sarcastic "thank you" note to "Freedom’s Watch." But this should only underscore that the backers of "Freedom’s Watch" passionately believe in the Iraq war and are not driven by partisan politics.
Here at CCP we only hope that campaign finance regulation will never erode the First Amendment so far that such important communication becomes banned. Regardless of one’s position on the war, the First Amendment protects a citizen’s right to make their feelings known – even anonymously.
